Advertisement
On June 29, 2007, I was asked to assist Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips and Marj Creech with the photographing of 2004 ballots. It was an exhilarating experience, we were all so happy. The reason for our joyous mood, was that time was far different from when we had all gone on record gathering adventures around the state of Ohio many times since the Presidential Election of 2004. Often we had to battle Boards of Elections and County Prosecutors to get access to what is legally known as “public records”, this being the actual 2004 ballots. Some records were never given. Yet on this Friday in June, we were in the office of Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, and we were treated with respect. Doug Miller, the Manager of Security for the Ohio Secretary of State (SOS) watched over us in a room with the records Richard had requested, and Doug allowed them to be examined and photographed. Richard, Marj, and myself were just so happy, literally grinning from ear to ear.
We learned that not all of Ohio’s counties had turned in their records. Some of what we wanted to photograph that day, was not found until a later search through the over 2,200 boxes of records they received during the four weeks it took to collect them from the counties. Now I have to wonder how much more it would be if the seven counties that turned over nothing, had sent records. Or if the 56 counties that sent only partial records, had sent all that was asked for. Then there is the 32 counties, which say they sent everything asked for. Lucas County gave heartily, 475 large banker boxes of election records, at 75 pounds each. Rural Jackson County sent in 13 boxes. Then they called about a month later to say to the Secretary of State’s office that they found 1 more box. They found it between a wall. They are missing most of their records.
I have since that day requested records that are of interest in the story of Ohio’s 2004 election. I have learned many things about the 88 County BOE’s, and the status of the controversial ballots.
The individual county inventory sheets, which the Delaware BOE faxed to the Secretary of State’s office on April 10, 2007, states on page 2 under;
“Description Of The Amount Of Storage Space Utilized By The Board To Maintain The Ballots Accounted For Above (such as the number and dimensions of boxes):”
The answer on this form from the Delaware BOE is 29 boxes 15 ½” x 10 ½” - 1 Cubic Foot. Yet on April 27, 2007 the fax received by the (SOS) states that 26 boxes 15 ½” x 10 ½” = 1 Cubic Foot. I must question what happened to the other 3 boxes in those seventeen days, and what was in them? Why is there no notation as to why the total number of boxes changed?
On April 10, 2007, on page 1 under “Total Number Of Provisional Ballots”, the fax form from the Delaware BOE is 1,872. On April 27, 2007, the answer has changed to 1,462 counted. So did they not count them the first time for a total, and they did count them the second time? What happened to the other 410 provisional ballots?
Soon after the 2004 election, the number reported on Blackwell’s website recorded 1891 provisional ballots issued in Delaware County. This total Blackwell later changed to 1879 provisional ballots. For these 416 were not counted, and 1463 provisional ballots were counted. Although the numbers are close, they do not match. How many provisional ballots exist? Even if ballots are not counted, shouldn’t they still exist?
The April 27th set of county inventory forms sent on was signed by Kim Spangler, the Director of the Delaware County Board of Elections, and Janet Brenneman, the Deputy Director. Kim has since then left her job at the Board of Elections, as did Democratic Chairman, John Myers. John gave himself credit for being the person responsible for thinking up the blocking the 2004 Presidential Recount. John Myers also called me at home multiple times to threaten me. One of those threats was to have me removed from the Board of Elections if I came in again for a record request. This incident was in the spring of 2006, and so I had to return to the office immediately to pay a bill for copies of records received, and then Richard, who had joined me, had a new record request to hand them. The security guard for Global Security Services was there, and yet I was not thrown out. The guard was called on us so often that a reporter from the local Delaware paper told me that he had let the BOE know that they had better stop calling the cops on us, or he would report on that. Of course, he was reluctant to report on the massive problems with access to records we were having, or the story of how Delaware has all gay shop owners, told to us by Kim and Janet to explain the high number of gay friendly votes there in Delaware, or the many other issues we were raising. As of today, Delaware is still looking for a new employee for the position of Director at the Board of Elections, just in case any of my gentle readers care to apply.
Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner and her staff have our heartfelt gratitude for the new record access. Looking at records Brunner has custody of was nice, not at all like those other experiences.
I still have great concerns on other election records in Ohio. The 2004 poll books and signature books that have survived to date, are still out in the individual County Board of Elections. I have suggested that the poll books and signature books be gathered. It is obvious that these are also evidence for the 2004 election theft. There has so far been no response to my request to further gather the records, these important books.
According a different inventory list compiled by the Secretary of State, one that includes all 88 Ohio counties, Delaware has turned over all ballots, an inventory sheet, and a signed inventory sheet. They do not indicate ballots missing, and they did not turn in a letter of explanation that they are missing some or all of their ballots (these are actual choices on the form). Counties that admit they are missing records are required to submit a letter of explanation to the Secretary of State.
From the photographs Marj Creech and I took of Orange Township D on July, 29, 2007, Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips, made this analysis, which will be in his forthcoming book, “Witness to a Crime”. Richard has also analyzed precinct Liberty E that I have also included below.
There were 117 gay-friendly Bush supporters. Of 519 Bush ballots, 419 were punched "Yes" on Issue One, 117 were punched "No" on Issue One.
Altogether there were 276 gay marriage supporters (ballots punched "No" on Issue One). Of these, 117 were punched for Bush, 153 for Kerry, 3 for others, 3 contained no vote for president.
There were 28 straight-ticket, gay-friendly Republicans -- ballots punched for Republican candidates for every contested office (President, United States Senator, United States Congress, State Representative, two County Commissioners, County Recorder, and three Supreme Court Justices) and punched "No" on Issue One. By comparison, there were only 13 straight-ticket, gay-friendly Democrats.
Bush got 111 (58.1%) of 191 ballots punched for William O'Neill, a Democratic candidate for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, who campaigned with a self-imposed contribution limit of $10 per person.
In Orange D, the telltale sign of ballot tampering with the Presidential election is directly beneath the absentee ballots. There are 176 regular ballots in this stack, and 175 of them are punched for Bush or Kerry. The one ballot punched for Michael Peroutka was found right at the top of the stack. The chances of this happening at random, of course, are 1 in 176.
Finally, at the bottom of the deck, are 14 ballots punched for Judith Lanzinger, a Republican candidate for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. This is another telltale sign of ballot tampering. Among the 176 regular ballots in this deck of cards, 101 are punched for Lanzinger (29 are punched for Fuerst, and 46 are undervotes). The odds of the last 14 being punched for Lanzinger are 1 in 3600.
This is similar to what we found in the punch cards for Liberty E, which were photocopied by the Delaware County Board of Elections in response to a public records request by Bill Buckel. Here it was the absentee ballots that were sorted according to Supreme Court candidate. Absolutely none of the 29 absentee ballots at the top of the stack are punched for Ellen Connally (nine are undervotes). And every single one of the 14 absentee ballots at the bottom of the stack is punched for Judith Lanzinger (none are undervotes). Because there were only 83 absentee ballots, the odds against these occurrences happening at random are much longer. Although 67 of 83 absentee ballots are not punched for Connally, the odds against this 29 in a row occurring at random at the top of the stack are about 2450 to 1. As only 39 of 83 absentee ballots are punched for Lanzinger, the odds 14 in a row occurring at random at the bottom of the deck are 5.7 chances in a million.
We learned that not all of Ohio’s counties had turned in their records. Some of what we wanted to photograph that day, was not found until a later search through the over 2,200 boxes of records they received during the four weeks it took to collect them from the counties. Now I have to wonder how much more it would be if the seven counties that turned over nothing, had sent records. Or if the 56 counties that sent only partial records, had sent all that was asked for. Then there is the 32 counties, which say they sent everything asked for. Lucas County gave heartily, 475 large banker boxes of election records, at 75 pounds each. Rural Jackson County sent in 13 boxes. Then they called about a month later to say to the Secretary of State’s office that they found 1 more box. They found it between a wall. They are missing most of their records.
I have since that day requested records that are of interest in the story of Ohio’s 2004 election. I have learned many things about the 88 County BOE’s, and the status of the controversial ballots.
The individual county inventory sheets, which the Delaware BOE faxed to the Secretary of State’s office on April 10, 2007, states on page 2 under;
“Description Of The Amount Of Storage Space Utilized By The Board To Maintain The Ballots Accounted For Above (such as the number and dimensions of boxes):”
The answer on this form from the Delaware BOE is 29 boxes 15 ½” x 10 ½” - 1 Cubic Foot. Yet on April 27, 2007 the fax received by the (SOS) states that 26 boxes 15 ½” x 10 ½” = 1 Cubic Foot. I must question what happened to the other 3 boxes in those seventeen days, and what was in them? Why is there no notation as to why the total number of boxes changed?
On April 10, 2007, on page 1 under “Total Number Of Provisional Ballots”, the fax form from the Delaware BOE is 1,872. On April 27, 2007, the answer has changed to 1,462 counted. So did they not count them the first time for a total, and they did count them the second time? What happened to the other 410 provisional ballots?
Soon after the 2004 election, the number reported on Blackwell’s website recorded 1891 provisional ballots issued in Delaware County. This total Blackwell later changed to 1879 provisional ballots. For these 416 were not counted, and 1463 provisional ballots were counted. Although the numbers are close, they do not match. How many provisional ballots exist? Even if ballots are not counted, shouldn’t they still exist?
The April 27th set of county inventory forms sent on was signed by Kim Spangler, the Director of the Delaware County Board of Elections, and Janet Brenneman, the Deputy Director. Kim has since then left her job at the Board of Elections, as did Democratic Chairman, John Myers. John gave himself credit for being the person responsible for thinking up the blocking the 2004 Presidential Recount. John Myers also called me at home multiple times to threaten me. One of those threats was to have me removed from the Board of Elections if I came in again for a record request. This incident was in the spring of 2006, and so I had to return to the office immediately to pay a bill for copies of records received, and then Richard, who had joined me, had a new record request to hand them. The security guard for Global Security Services was there, and yet I was not thrown out. The guard was called on us so often that a reporter from the local Delaware paper told me that he had let the BOE know that they had better stop calling the cops on us, or he would report on that. Of course, he was reluctant to report on the massive problems with access to records we were having, or the story of how Delaware has all gay shop owners, told to us by Kim and Janet to explain the high number of gay friendly votes there in Delaware, or the many other issues we were raising. As of today, Delaware is still looking for a new employee for the position of Director at the Board of Elections, just in case any of my gentle readers care to apply.
Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner and her staff have our heartfelt gratitude for the new record access. Looking at records Brunner has custody of was nice, not at all like those other experiences.
I still have great concerns on other election records in Ohio. The 2004 poll books and signature books that have survived to date, are still out in the individual County Board of Elections. I have suggested that the poll books and signature books be gathered. It is obvious that these are also evidence for the 2004 election theft. There has so far been no response to my request to further gather the records, these important books.
According a different inventory list compiled by the Secretary of State, one that includes all 88 Ohio counties, Delaware has turned over all ballots, an inventory sheet, and a signed inventory sheet. They do not indicate ballots missing, and they did not turn in a letter of explanation that they are missing some or all of their ballots (these are actual choices on the form). Counties that admit they are missing records are required to submit a letter of explanation to the Secretary of State.
From the photographs Marj Creech and I took of Orange Township D on July, 29, 2007, Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips, made this analysis, which will be in his forthcoming book, “Witness to a Crime”. Richard has also analyzed precinct Liberty E that I have also included below.
There were 117 gay-friendly Bush supporters. Of 519 Bush ballots, 419 were punched "Yes" on Issue One, 117 were punched "No" on Issue One.
Altogether there were 276 gay marriage supporters (ballots punched "No" on Issue One). Of these, 117 were punched for Bush, 153 for Kerry, 3 for others, 3 contained no vote for president.
There were 28 straight-ticket, gay-friendly Republicans -- ballots punched for Republican candidates for every contested office (President, United States Senator, United States Congress, State Representative, two County Commissioners, County Recorder, and three Supreme Court Justices) and punched "No" on Issue One. By comparison, there were only 13 straight-ticket, gay-friendly Democrats.
Bush got 111 (58.1%) of 191 ballots punched for William O'Neill, a Democratic candidate for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, who campaigned with a self-imposed contribution limit of $10 per person.
In Orange D, the telltale sign of ballot tampering with the Presidential election is directly beneath the absentee ballots. There are 176 regular ballots in this stack, and 175 of them are punched for Bush or Kerry. The one ballot punched for Michael Peroutka was found right at the top of the stack. The chances of this happening at random, of course, are 1 in 176.
Finally, at the bottom of the deck, are 14 ballots punched for Judith Lanzinger, a Republican candidate for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. This is another telltale sign of ballot tampering. Among the 176 regular ballots in this deck of cards, 101 are punched for Lanzinger (29 are punched for Fuerst, and 46 are undervotes). The odds of the last 14 being punched for Lanzinger are 1 in 3600.
This is similar to what we found in the punch cards for Liberty E, which were photocopied by the Delaware County Board of Elections in response to a public records request by Bill Buckel. Here it was the absentee ballots that were sorted according to Supreme Court candidate. Absolutely none of the 29 absentee ballots at the top of the stack are punched for Ellen Connally (nine are undervotes). And every single one of the 14 absentee ballots at the bottom of the stack is punched for Judith Lanzinger (none are undervotes). Because there were only 83 absentee ballots, the odds against these occurrences happening at random are much longer. Although 67 of 83 absentee ballots are not punched for Connally, the odds against this 29 in a row occurring at random at the top of the stack are about 2450 to 1. As only 39 of 83 absentee ballots are punched for Lanzinger, the odds 14 in a row occurring at random at the bottom of the deck are 5.7 chances in a million.